One of the most interesting topics in science must be time traveling for which I assume a photonic traveler (i.e., a photon) is situated within subspace 1 at the center of our temporal universe in Figure 11. In view of this figure, the outward speed of subspaces 3 moves somewhat faster than subspace 2 (i.e., v3>v2) toward the boundary of our universe since subspace 3 is closer to the boundary.
Now we let the photonic traveler start his voyage with a “narrow pulse” width Δt’ from subspace 1 (i.e., very closed to our planet earth) to a distant subspace 3, Nature of Temporal (t>0) Quantum Theory: Part II
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.93562
subspaces, one travels at a velocity v and the other is stand still. In view of this figure, we see that the hypothetical scenario is a “physical realizable” paradigm, since these two subspaces are embedded within a temporal (t>0) space.
Now, if we let Q1station transmits a pulse signal with a durationΔt to Q2station.
Assuming without any significant time delay, the digital pulse as received by Q2
station appeal “wider” due to relativistic dilation as can be seen from Eq. (41). For instance, if we assume the time-dilation from Q1station relatively with respect to Q2station is two time wider (i.e.,Δt’ = 2Δt), thenΔt’ is two times wider as received by Q2; to complete for a bit” of information transmitted from Q1, as depicted in Figure 10, where we see that the transmittedΔE is “conservation”. Needless to say that if the received pulse ofΔt is transmitted back to Q1in motion; the receiving pulse width will be 2 time broader, as can be seen in the figure. In which we see that;
one can exploits faster “time-digital” transmission from a static station Q2to a moving station Q1. From Q1to Q2static station, one can take advantage for larger communication subspace, such as synthetic aperture radar imaging [22].
Figure 9.
Relativistic digital transmission within temporal subspace.
Figure 10.
A relativistic digital information transmission,Δt’= 2Δt.
Quantum Mechanics
As I see it; it is our universe governs the science and it is not the science dictates our universe. Within our universe every subspace is created by an amount of energy ΔE and a section of timeΔt. Once a section ofΔt has been used, it cannot bring it back, although we can create the sameΔt at a different time. AlthoughΔE can be traded forΔt, but it is “impossible” to squeezeΔt equals to zero (i.e., t = 0), and this is the “temporal limit” of our universe. In this we see that there is “no” substance that can travel instantly (i.e., t = 0) within our universe. Even someday we may discover substance that travels beyond the speed of light, this is by “no” means that the substance can travel instantly (i.e., t = 0) within our universe.
Nevertheless, the nature of a section of timeΔt is all about our temporal (t>0) universe, in which time is space and space is time. I have shown that within our universe every subspace takes an amount of energyΔE and a section of timeΔt to
“tangle”; by whichΔE andΔt cannot be separated. AlthoughΔE andΔt can be mutually traded, it is tradingΔE forΔt, orΔυforΔt, but not trading forΔE orΔt forΔυsinceΔt is a real variable but “not” a physical quantity. But we cannot trade Δt forΔE; once a section ofΔt has been used, it cannot bring it back since time is a forward dependent variable. It is however, in principle, possible to tradeΔE (orΔυ) for a smallestΔt, but it is “not” possible to squeezeΔt to zero, no matter how much energyΔE that one is willing to pay. SinceΔt = 0 is the “instantaneous” response that “cannot” be reached within a temporal (t>0) subspace, in which we see that Δt is lower bounded byΔt =0. ButΔt = 0 exists only within a timeless (t = 0) space but not within our universe.
In view of the laws of entropy, information, uncertainty, relativity, and universe as given by
ΔI�ΔEΔt¼h, per bit of information (42) ΔS�EΔt=T¼h=T, per bit of information (43)
ΔEΔt≥h (44)
Δt0¼ Δt ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 1�v2=c2
p (45)
U:ΔE Δt≥ðΔmc2ÞΔt, ΔE Δt≥h (46) Notice that law of universe in Eq. (46) has a set of equations; one is for an isolated mass m and the other is for isolated photonic-particle, since photon is a
“virtual” particle has no mass. Nevertheless, these laws and principles are pro- foundly associated with (ΔE,Δt), where unit (ΔE,Δt) is the “necessary” cost within our universe. We have shown that it is possible to “squeeze”Δt by widening ΔE. This corresponds to a higher energy of shorter wavelengthλ. But it is “impos- sible” to trade for infinitesimal small section ofΔt (i.e., t≈0), which is physical limited as imposed by our temporal (t>0) universe.
10. Time traveling?
One of the most interesting topics in science must be time traveling for which I assume a photonic traveler (i.e., a photon) is situated within subspace 1 at the center of our temporal universe in Figure 11. In view of this figure, the outward speed of subspaces 3 moves somewhat faster than subspace 2 (i.e., v3>v2) toward the boundary of our universe since subspace 3 is closer to the boundary.
Now we let the photonic traveler start his voyage with a “narrow pulse” width Δt’ from subspace 1 (i.e., very closed to our planet earth) to a distant subspace 3, Nature of Temporal (t>0) Quantum Theory: Part II
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.93562
which has an outward velocity of v3. If the “relativistic” time dilationΔt’ between these two subspaces is “two” times wider than the static sunspace 1 (i.e.,Δt = 2Δt’).
Then velocity of subspace 3 can be calculated by means Einstein’s special theory of relativity as given by
Δt0¼ Δt ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 1�v2=c2
p (47)
For which the outward velocity V3is given by
V3¼0:87 c¼0:87�186, 000¼161, 820 miles=s
With reference to Hubble space telescopic observation [27], the boundary of our universe is about 15 billion light years away from subspace 1; for which Subspace 3 is estimated about 13 billion light years away from the center of our universe.
Which will take the photonic traveler a 13 billion light-years and possible added another 13 billion light-years to catch-up to subspace 3, since subspace 3 has moved away as traveler’s voyage started. For which the traveler will take about 26 billion light-years to reach subspace 3, at speed of light.
Nevertheless, as arrived at subspace 3, the traveler’s pulse pulse-width reduces to about 1/4 the size. Which has a 3/4 “gain” in relative time-duration with respect to the static subspace 1 and the gain can be translated into “duration” of time that has been taken during the voyage. Since it took about a total 26 billion light-years journey to reach subspace 3, there is a “net gain”of about 19.5 billion light-years ahead “relatively” to the time duration that has gone by at the subspace 1. In other words; there is a total 19.5 billion light-years “relatively ahead” of subspace 1, after a total 26 billion light-years journey to subspace 3, as illustrated in Figure 12.
Figure 11.
A schematic diagram of our expanding universe. It shows our universe is a temporal (t>0) dynamic stochastic universe; time and space are“coexisted.”(μo,εo) are the permeability and permittivity of space.
Quantum Mechanics
After the long journey arrived at subspace 3, the traveler is contemplating when he should return back. The “dilemma” is that if he waited too long, he may not be able to return home soon enough to enjoy some of his time-gained, since subspace 3 is moving even faster closer to the speed of light. For which he has decided to return right away, since is a longer journey of “more” than 26 billion light-years to cover, in view of an outward velocity of subspace 3 to overcome.
But as I see it; all the “relative” time-gained will be used up on his journey back home; it turns out the traveler will be home at precisely the same time of subspace 3
“without” any time gain. This part I will let you to figure out, since you have all the mathematics to play with. Yet the worst scenario is that; the traveler “cannot” find his home, since his home had been gone a few billion light-years ago after he had departed from subspace 1 to subspace 3.
On the other hand, if the traveler is “not” a cruising photonic particle, then the kinetic energy to reach a velocity of V3= 161,820 miles/s can be calculated as
K.E. = ½ m v2= ½ m (161,820)2.
which is a price that “nobody” can afford, even just for one-way trip to subspace 3, where m is the mass of the traveler, in which we see that “time traveling” to the future is “unlikely”, even assume we can travel at the speed of light.
Nevertheless, every subspace within our universe is always attached a price; a section of timeΔt and an amount of energyΔE, although the unit (ΔE,Δt) is a
“necessary” cost. For example the “cost” to create a golf ball; it need a huge amount of energyΔE and a section of timeΔt, but without an amount of informationΔI (or equivalent an amount ofΔS) it will not make it happen.
Another scenario is that traveling within “empty” space as depicted in Figure 13, as normally assumed. in spite it is a nonphysical paradigm; we see that traveler can reach subspace 3 instantly and return back as he wishes, since within a timeless (t = 0) space it has “no” distance and no time, although the diagram shows it has.
And this is precisely a virtual mathematical paradigm do to science, even though the subspace has no time and yet appears it has. For which I have found; practically all the laws, principles and theories of science were developed from the same empty space, which is “not” a physical realizable subspace.
Since science is a “principle” of logic, in which we see that a simple logic worth more than tons of mathematics. For example, as illustrated in Figure 14, if a time- traveler able to remove himself from current moment of 2020 and searching for last year of the same moment of 2019. The question is can he find it? The apparent answer is that; last year of our universe has been departed. Similarly, the traveler is wishing to visit next year 2021, but next year of our universe has not arrived yet.
In short, I remark that it is physical realizable science that “directs” the mathe- matics, but not the virtual mathematics that leads science, although science needs
Figure 12.
The“relative”time gain as the traveler reached subspace 3. BLY represents billion light-years.
Nature of Temporal (t>0) Quantum Theory: Part II DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.93562
which has an outward velocity of v3. If the “relativistic” time dilationΔt’ between these two subspaces is “two” times wider than the static sunspace 1 (i.e.,Δt = 2Δt’).
Then velocity of subspace 3 can be calculated by means Einstein’s special theory of relativity as given by
Δt0¼ Δt ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 1�v2=c2
p (47)
For which the outward velocity V3is given by
V3¼0:87 c¼0:87�186, 000¼161, 820 miles=s
With reference to Hubble space telescopic observation [27], the boundary of our universe is about 15 billion light years away from subspace 1; for which Subspace 3 is estimated about 13 billion light years away from the center of our universe.
Which will take the photonic traveler a 13 billion light-years and possible added another 13 billion light-years to catch-up to subspace 3, since subspace 3 has moved away as traveler’s voyage started. For which the traveler will take about 26 billion light-years to reach subspace 3, at speed of light.
Nevertheless, as arrived at subspace 3, the traveler’s pulse pulse-width reduces to about 1/4 the size. Which has a 3/4 “gain” in relative time-duration with respect to the static subspace 1 and the gain can be translated into “duration” of time that has been taken during the voyage. Since it took about a total 26 billion light-years journey to reach subspace 3, there is a “net gain”of about 19.5 billion light-years ahead “relatively” to the time duration that has gone by at the subspace 1. In other words; there is a total 19.5 billion light-years “relatively ahead” of subspace 1, after a total 26 billion light-years journey to subspace 3, as illustrated in Figure 12.
Figure 11.
A schematic diagram of our expanding universe. It shows our universe is a temporal (t>0) dynamic stochastic universe; time and space are“coexisted.”(μo,εo) are the permeability and permittivity of space.
Quantum Mechanics
After the long journey arrived at subspace 3, the traveler is contemplating when he should return back. The “dilemma” is that if he waited too long, he may not be able to return home soon enough to enjoy some of his time-gained, since subspace 3 is moving even faster closer to the speed of light. For which he has decided to return right away, since is a longer journey of “more” than 26 billion light-years to cover, in view of an outward velocity of subspace 3 to overcome.
But as I see it; all the “relative” time-gained will be used up on his journey back home; it turns out the traveler will be home at precisely the same time of subspace 3
“without” any time gain. This part I will let you to figure out, since you have all the mathematics to play with. Yet the worst scenario is that; the traveler “cannot” find his home, since his home had been gone a few billion light-years ago after he had departed from subspace 1 to subspace 3.
On the other hand, if the traveler is “not” a cruising photonic particle, then the kinetic energy to reach a velocity of V3= 161,820 miles/s can be calculated as
K.E. = ½ m v2= ½ m (161,820)2.
which is a price that “nobody” can afford, even just for one-way trip to subspace 3, where m is the mass of the traveler, in which we see that “time traveling” to the future is “unlikely”, even assume we can travel at the speed of light.
Nevertheless, every subspace within our universe is always attached a price; a section of timeΔt and an amount of energyΔE, although the unit (ΔE,Δt) is a
“necessary” cost. For example the “cost” to create a golf ball; it need a huge amount of energyΔE and a section of timeΔt, but without an amount of informationΔI (or equivalent an amount ofΔS) it will not make it happen.
Another scenario is that traveling within “empty” space as depicted in Figure 13, as normally assumed. in spite it is a nonphysical paradigm; we see that traveler can reach subspace 3 instantly and return back as he wishes, since within a timeless (t = 0) space it has “no” distance and no time, although the diagram shows it has.
And this is precisely a virtual mathematical paradigm do to science, even though the subspace has no time and yet appears it has. For which I have found; practically all the laws, principles and theories of science were developed from the same empty space, which is “not” a physical realizable subspace.
Since science is a “principle” of logic, in which we see that a simple logic worth more than tons of mathematics. For example, as illustrated in Figure 14, if a time- traveler able to remove himself from current moment of 2020 and searching for last year of the same moment of 2019. The question is can he find it? The apparent answer is that; last year of our universe has been departed. Similarly, the traveler is wishing to visit next year 2021, but next year of our universe has not arrived yet.
In short, I remark that it is physical realizable science that “directs” the mathe- matics, but not the virtual mathematics that leads science, although science needs
Figure 12.
The“relative”time gain as the traveler reached subspace 3. BLY represents billion light-years.
Nature of Temporal (t>0) Quantum Theory: Part II DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.93562
mathematics. In which I note that; it is “not” how rigorous the mathematics is, it is the physical realizable science we embrace. Otherwise more and more virtual sci- ences will continuingly emerge. In view of relativity, we can “relatively” slow down the time somewhat, but we can “never” change the speed of time. It is you walk with time, and it is “not” time walks with you.